Insurance get out clauses

[cotapaxi]

Hi

Has anybody heard of these terms applied to a bike before:

Any loss, damage of liability arising from or claim for:
The failure, breakage or breakdown of:
the engine motor and/or its associated subsystems,
the transmission,
any electrical or electronic system or equipment,
any cooling or lubricating system,
any other mechanically or hydraulically operated system or equipment,
the fuel system and/or its associated subsystems

So the way I read that if my bike breaks even a cable snapping I lose all my cover including that cover in case I hit something else so could lose my bike and still end up with a big bill for somebody's else's vehicle. Not planning to neglect my bike or anything but that seems a bit like a nice get out of jail free card.

Thoughts anyone?

[Akzle]

Thoughts anyone?

insurance is a scam.

here jessjess jess... come 'ere gal, here jess, here jess....

(she's coming...)

[clonak]

insurance is a scam.

+1.

Although, it did come in handy when my car got stolen at the start of the year. :/

[Hugo Nougo]

Without seeing the whole document I would say this is what you"re not insured for, breakdowns, there should be a paragraph outling what you are insured for,

[JimO]

insurance is a scam.

here jessjess jess... come 'ere gal, here jess, here jess....

(she's coming...)

until you Tbone that new BMW, or your house burns down

[Matt_TG]

I'd imagine that those exclusions refer to the PART that broke / failed / exploded, not the resulting damage from the failure. If you crash and damage your bike because some part of the engine failed, they wouldn't fix that part of the engine but would fix the rest of the damage.

As said before, you have to take the clause in the context of the rest of the wording.

[Edbear]

I'd imagine that those exclusions refer to the PART that broke / failed / exploded, not the resulting damage from the failure. If you crash and damage your bike because some part of the engine failed, they wouldn't fix that part of the engine but would fix the rest of the damage.

As said before, you have to take the clause in the context of the rest of the wording.

Yeah, I'd say that those parts directly referred to are not covered by the policy.